Equivalence of sub-optimal control strategy for vehicle active suspension

PDF(4172 KB)

Journal of Vibration and Shock ›› 2023, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (23) : 316-324.

LU Hongwei1,ZHANG Zhifei1,XU Zhongming1,TAN Kanlun2,ZHENG Xiaoyong2

Author information +

History +

Abstract

Compared with the optimal suspension control with full state feedback, the suboptimal control with non-full state feedback reduces the number of input variables while maintaining a similar control effect. This paper compares the ability of two methods to obtain suboptimal control, namely the minimum norm method and the dual damping control method, in maintaining equivalence with optimal control. By comprehensively considering comfort, suspension dynamic deflection and tire dynamic load, the reasonable parameter ranges of three different types of optimal control (I-type LQR control, II-type LQR control and H∞ control) are given, and the equivalent degree of the suboptimal controls to the optimal control is measured by the relative difference of control force. The numerical simulation results show that, within reasonable control parameters, the dual damping control is more equivalent to the LQR control, while the suboptimal control obtained by the least optimal norm method is more equivalent to the H∞ control.

Key words

Automotive active suspension / Suboptimal control / Minimum norm method / Dual damping control

Cite this article

EndNote

Ris (Procite)

Bibtex

Download Citations

LU Hongwei1,ZHANG Zhifei1,XU Zhongming1,TAN Kanlun2,ZHENG Xiaoyong2. Equivalence of sub-optimal control strategy for vehicle active suspension[J]. Journal of Vibration and Shock, 2023, 42(23): 316-324

References

[1] Brezas P, Smith M C, Hoult W. A clipped-optimal control algorithm for semi-active vehicle suspensions: theory and experimental evaluation [J]. Automatica, 2015, 53: 188-94.
[2] Unger A, Schimmack F, Lohmann B, et al. Application of LQ-based semi-active suspension control in a vehicle [J]. Control Engineering Practice, 2013, 21(12): 1841-50.
[3] ElMadany M M, Al Bassam B A, Fayed A A. Preview control of slow-active suspension systems [J]. Journal of Vibration and Control, 2010, 17(2): 245-58.
[4] Xu Y, Xie Z, Zhao J, et al. Robust non-fragile finite frequency H∞ control for uncertain active suspension systems with time-delay using T-S fuzzy approach [J]. Journal of the Franklin Institute, 2021, 358(8): 4209-38.
[5] Kim K, Jeon D. Vibration suppression in an MR fluid damper suspension system [J]. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 1999, 10(10): 779-86.
[6] Dong X, Yu M, Liao C, et al. Comparative research on semi-active control strategies for magneto-rheological suspension [J]. Nonlinear Dynamics, 2010, 59: 433-53.
[7] Li W, Xie Z, Zhao J, et al. Static-output-feedback based robust fuzzy wheelbase preview control for uncertain active suspensions with time delay and finite frequency constraint [J]. IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, 2021, 8(3): 664-78.
[8] Zhao J, Wang X, Wong P K, et al. Multi-objective frequency domain-constrained static output feedback control for delayed active suspension systems with wheelbase preview information [J]. Nonlinear Dynamics, 2021, 103(2): 1757-74.
[9] 马松辉, 陈怀民, 王鹏. 静态输出反馈控制的一种数值解法 [J]. 信息与控制, 2010, 39(02): 218-22+27.
[10] Brezas P, Smith M C. Linear Quadratic Optimal and Risk-Sensitive Control for Vehicle Active Suspensions [J]. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, 2014, 22(2): 543-56.
[11] Zong L H, Gong X L, Guo C Y, et al. Inverse neuro-fuzzy MR damper model and its application in vibration control of vehicle suspension system [J]. Vehicle System Dynamics, 2012, 50(7): 1025-41.
[12] Choi S B, Li W, Yu M, et al. State of the art of control schemes for smart systems featuring magneto-rheological materials [J]. Smart Materials and Structures, 2016, 25(4): 043001.
[13] Levine W, Athans M. On the determination of the optimal constant output feedback gains for linear multivariable systems [J]. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 1970, 15(1): 44-8.
[14] Kosut R. Suboptimal control of linear time-invariant systems subject to control structure constraints [J]. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 1970, 15(5): 557-63.
[15] 张玉春, 王良曦, 丛华. 汽车主动悬挂系统的次优控制及仿真 [J]. 系统仿真学报, 2003, (08): 1095-7.
[16] 李金辉, 张柯柯, 徐立友. 重型汽车主动悬架次优控制策略设计与分析 [J]. 振动与冲击, 2020, 39(13): 141-7.
[17] 鲁红伟. 基于磁流变阻尼器逆模型的汽车半主动悬架控制 [D]. 重庆; 重庆大学, 2022.
[18] Venhovens P J T. The development and implementation of adaptive semi-active suspension control [J]. Vehicle System Dynamics, 1994, 23(3): 211-35.
[19] Besinger F H, Cebon D, Cole D J. Force control of a semi-active damper [J]. Vehicle System Dynamics, 1995, 24(9): 695-723.
[20] Ahmadian M, Pare C A. A quarter-car experimental analysis of alternative semiactive control methods [J]. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 2000, 11(8): 604-12.
[21] Ahmadian M, Vahdati N. Transient dynamics of semiactive suspensions with hybrid control [J]. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, 2006, 17(2): 145-53.
[22] Ahmadian M, Song X, Southward S C. No-jerk skyhook control methods for semiactive suspensions [J]. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 2004, 126(4): 580-4.
[23] Savaresi S M, Spelta C. Mixed sky-hook and ADD: approaching the filtering limits of a semi-active suspension [J]. Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, 2006, 129(4): 382-92.
[24] Hrovat D. Survey of advanced suspension developments and related optimal control applications [J]. Automatica, 1997, 33(10): 1781-817.
[25] Elbeheiry E M, Karnopp D C. Optimal control of vehicle random vibration with constrained suspension deflection [J]. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 1996, 189(5): 547-64.
[26] Bai X L, Lei J. Internal model-based optimal vibration control for linear vehicle suspension systems with actuator delay [J]. Ferroelectrics, 2019, 549(1): 195-203.
[27] 兰波, 喻凡, 刘娇蛟. 主动悬架LQG控制器设计 [J]. 系统仿真学报, 2003, (01): 138-40+53.
[28] 寇发荣, 高亚威, 景强强等. 基于路面等级自适应的主动悬架LQG控制 [J]. 振动与冲击, 2020, 39(23): 30-7.